seriously if we're going to go into 'foreign' ownerehip.. then i'd rather see lots of cash being put into the club, WHETHER AW wants to spend is another issue. Surely we really really don't mind a big expenditure to replace/guide diabolical diaby/Song. Arshavin was a good e.g. of how with available REAL HUGE portion funds AW can really buy.

A mandatory takeover bid does not necessarily mean he will take the club over. Just because he has to bid for the rest of the shares it doesn't mean the other shareholders are obliged to sell to him. He could make a paltry (by comparison) offer that the other shareholders decline, buy a couple of shares to take him over the threshold, which will get the takeover panel off his back, before continuing to build a stake without pushing for total ownership. This would block the Russian and be in most people's interest as we broadly get to keep the current ownership model which, I think, is what most supporters want.

Thanks a million for that Anthony. It's exactly what I wanted. some sort of succinct summary of what sounds like a very feasible outcome

I can't see Kroenke as a predator. My impression of him is that he's more someone who wants the kudos that comes with an association with our ancient club (after all the Yanks love a bit of history, having so little of their own) and hopefully this might result in a mutually beneficial relationship to secure the future of our famous institution, as we've always known it, rather than Stan's majority shareholding indicating some sort of year dot seachange of a metamorphisis, where the Arsenal suddenly becomes an entirely different animal

I've just read an interesting article in the telegraph this morning and I've come up with another theory...

Apparently, the takeover rules state that the mandatory bid has to be at the highest price paid in the last 12 months. As shares were traded at £10,500 earlier in the year, but are currently worth £8,000 it's unlikely that he will go above the threshold as it stands. If he did, it would make it a very attrative offer for the sellers, but not so attractive for him as he'd be paying 25% above market value.

I also read somewhere a couple of weeks ago (I think it was in the Times) that he's still not paid Fizman the £50M that he owes him for the shares that he bought from him earlier in the year either. this leads me to the question of which other directors haven't been paid yet either?

Assuming at some point in the future Stan does pass the threshold and has to make an offer and this is accepted by Nina Bracewell-Smith and Usmanov, but none of the other major shareholders/directors he could then settle his outstanding debts with Fizman et al by returning their shares to them. Could there be a behind the scenes agreement in place? Peter Hill-Wood strikes me as the 'gentlements agreement / handshake' type and as he was the one to sell 100 shares to Kroenke yesterday it makes me think there must be some sort of deal going on that we're not aware of.

I appreciate this may seem a little far fetched, or like a conspiracy theory by a raving lunatic, but it made perfect sense on the bus in to work this morning!